17 thoughts on “News/Politics 7-16-20

  1. Boycott?

    No, Buycott! 🙂


    Hijacking the boycott of the woke cancel culture clowns. 🙂


    “The Goya Foods boycott is an insult to Hispanics, America’s largest minority group. Politicians and pundits — some Hispanic, many others painfully woke-white — are calling for a boycott of the largest Hispanic food manufacturer and distributor in the nation, a company that employs more than 4,000 people.

    The Bodega and Small Business Association, which represents thousands of New York City bodegas, is not taking this lying down. We are urging our stores and customers to stock up on all of Goya’s great products.

    We are calling for a Goya buycott.

    It all began after Bob Unanue, Goya’s CEO, committed the grave sin this month of praising President Trump. As The New York Times reported, the backlash surged following Unanue’s recent visit to the White House, where he dared to suggest that America was “blessed” to have Trump as its leader. Cue the Twitter hysterics.

    Did any of these boycotters stop to think about the impact their actions would have on the more than 13,000 bodegas in the Big Apple — and on hundreds of thousands more stores all over the country that sell Goya products, a staple of the Hispanic dining table? Did they stop to think about the thousands of black and Latino workers Goya employs?

    The boycotters say that Unanue crossed the line with his words, because Trump has disparaged Hispanic immigrants. Even if they are right, however, their own actions would, if successful, do greater harm to Hispanics than any of Trump’s words.

    I’m a Hispanic immigrant, and here is one thing I know. The Unanue family, immigrants from Spain, are role models for every single immigrant to this country — a family whose achievements attest to the promise of America as a land of opportunity. Goya is a job generator, while most of its detractors haven’t done a thing to create a single job for the Hispanic community.

    In fact, one of the loudest detractors of the company rose to fame when she canceled 25,000 Amazon jobs for the community she represents — a politician who grew up in relative affluence in Westchester and went by the name Sandy until it was politically convenient to be known as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Now she wants to cancel Goya.

    AOC can go stuff it. I am proud to stand with Goya and all of the great products that the company provides for my community. These boycotters, safely ensconced in their Twitter bubbles, don’t understand the first thing about the ordinary Hispanic shopper. And imagine the sheer gall it takes to threaten a Hispanic company popular with Hispanics for expressing a political opinion.

    Yet the boycotters won’t win this fight — the buycotters will.”

    Liked by 2 people

  2. First Sessions bites the dust to the Trump pick, and now another win. 🙂


    “Dr. Ronny Jackson won a Republican primary run-off race Tuesday night. If that name sounds familiar it is because he is a former White House physician who served at the White House from 2006 to 2018. He served as the president’s physician from 2013 to 2018. He is a retired United States Navy rear admiral. Now he lives in Texas’ 13th District and very likely headed to serving as a member of the House of Representatives in the seat now occupied by retiring Rep. Mac Thornberry.

    Rep. Thornberry didn’t endorse Dr. Jackson. He endorsed agricultural lobbyist Josh Winegarner in the primary run-off. President Trump endorsed Jackson just days before the March primary. That endorsement likely took Jackson into the run-off race. Thornberry has been in office for 25 years. It set up a Trump versus GOP Establishment scenario. Jackson won that battle and Trump is pleased.”

    “Trump nominated Jackson for Veterans Affairs secretary but that didn’t go anywhere because of the smear campaign launched by Democrats, led by Montana Democrat Senator Jon Tester. Jackson was accused of alcohol abuse and mishandling prescription drugs. He denied the allegations, resigned from his position, withdrew from the nomination, and moved back to Texas. It would be entirely understandable if he sees his near future in a seat in the House of Representatives as sweet revenge.

    The endorsement from President Trump was a clear boost to his victory in the run-off. He received help from Trump’s re-election team, too. Trump’s endorsement record isn’t perfect but it still has juice.

    In the runoff campaign, Jackson was aided by officials from the Trump re-election campaign, which dramatically boosted his once meager fundraising efforts. And they helped Jackson hire a professional Republican operative to run the doctor’s campaign.

    Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh called the victory “a clear testament to the power and value of President Trump’s endorsement and support.”

    And, just like that, the long knives come out. The media, hellbent to get Joe Biden elected president in November thanks to their absolute hatred of President Trump, is ready to take Jackson down again. This morning, Politico published a piece on Jackson’s appearance on Fox and Friends earlier in the morning. ”


    Off course they did. Smears, lies, and slander is all they have left.


  3. Some folks refuse to let the press revise the history here.


    For this lady, it’s personal. She knows what Cuomo’s idiot decision did, and she brought receipts.



  4. He will be destroyed. And I can’t wait to watch it. Note too this isn’t 54% who think Biden will be beating Trump, it’s that only 54% even think he’s capable of debating him.

    And note the fear from Democrats who don’t want to see Joe up there on stage because they know he is incapable of winning.


    “Only 54% Think Biden Capable of Debating Trump”

    “A New York Times columnist has urged likely Democratic nominee Joe Biden not to debate President Trump in the fall. Most voters think that’s a bad idea, although only just over half believe Biden is even up to debating Trump given ongoing questions about his mental health.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters think Biden is capable of debating the president. Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree and say he is not capable of such a debate. Another 11% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

    But then 38% of all voters, including 20% of Democrats, believe Biden is suffering from some form of dementia. Sixty-one percent (61%) think it is important for him to address the dementia issue publicly.

    Sixty-eight percent (68%) of voters think it is important for Biden and Trump to hold one or more televised presidential debates this fall, with 51% who say it’s Very Important.

    Fifty-six percent (56%) believe it would hurt Biden’s candidacy if he refused to debate Trump. Only nine percent (9%) say it would help him, while 29% feel a failure to debate would have no impact on Biden’s bid for the White House.”


  5. While it only works out to 2.81% of the total, it seems like too much.


    “BANKS WILL MAKE out with $18 billion in fees for processing small business Paycheck Protection Program relief loans during the pandemic, according to calculations by Amanda Fischer, policy director at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a progressive economic think tank.

    That’s money taken directly out of the overall $640 billion pot of funding Congress allocated to the program it created as part of the CARES Act. “If we did it through a public institution, there would be [more than] $140 billion left,” Fischer noted, as opposed to the $130 billion still up for grabs. The Washington Center for Equitable Growth is releasing an analysis of the government response to the pandemic as soon as this week.

    The fees compensate the banks for some of the costs that come with processing loans — call center time to handle business owners’ questions, employee hours spent on processing paperwork for both loan and forgiveness applications — and some of the risk they shoulder if any of the loans they extend end up being fraudulent. But there is no credit risk; if business owners who qualified for PPP loans later default, the Small Business Association takes the hit, not the banks. “Basically it’s free money,” Fischer said.

    For some banks, this money represents a hefty windfall. New Jersey-based Cross River Bank’s estimated $163 million haul would be more than double its net revenue last year. JPMorgan Chase could make $864 million.

    The fact that banks are siphoning money off of the relief program is thanks to the fact that the United States had no existing public infrastructure ready to quickly get money out to struggling businesses when the pandemic hit. Fischer characterized it as “a failure of preparedness,” adding, “We should have invested in better systems.” The Small Business Association, which is running the PPP program, has long been criticized for struggling to process emergency relief quickly during past natural disasters. So when the time came to respond to the coronavirus crisis as fast as possible, the SBA was in no position to do it itself, and Congress mandated that the loans be run through banks instead. There weren’t many other options. “It’s hard to build the plane while you’re flying it,” Fischer said.

    But on top of the fact that the program leaked money to banks, relying on these firms meant an uneven distribution of funds. One study found that areas served by the country’s four largest banks — JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank, and Bank of America — underperformed in terms of how many businesses got PPP funding. On the flip side, another found that places with large numbers of mid-sized and community banks saw more businesses get PPP loans. That meant that whether a small business received the money it needed to stay afloat depended in large part on the composition of financial institutions in its area. “That’s a really perverse outcome,” Fischer said.”


  6. A campaign is kicking off to educate the ignorant and uninformed.


    “Black conservatives kick off campaign to save Emancipation Memorial”

    “That statue depicts President Abraham Lincoln holding the Emancipation Proclamation and a Black man kneeling at his feet who is newly freed from slavery. The statue has been the target of recent protests and even D.C. delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton called to remove the “problematic” statue.

    “Although formerly enslaved Americans paid for this statue to be built in 1876, the design and sculpting process was done without their input and it shows,” Holmes Norton said in a statement. “The statue fails to note in any way how enslaved African Americans pushed for their own emancipation.”

    The nonprofit UrbanCURE held an “Emancipation Celebration” Tuesday at Lincoln Park near the now fenced-off statue to promote their petition asserting the statue is “part of the heart and soul of our country.”

    “Claiming ‘racism’ about this statue shows the ignorance of this movement. Black folk like DC Mayor Bowser and Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton need to learn black history,” said Star Parker, founder of UrbanCURE, in a statement. “Archer Alexander is not kneeling; as a track star prepared to run a dash, the kinetic motion in this figure shows him just emancipated to stand and run his race as a free man.”

    The statue was reportedly paid for by newly freed slaves in 1865.

    The idea for the statue started with a formerly enslaved woman who wanted to pay homage to Lincoln after he was assassinated in 1865, according to the National Park Service.

    Charlotte Scott, of Virginia, used the first $5 she earned after being freed from slavery to launch a fundraising campaign, the park service said.

    Other funds were collected exclusively from formerly enslaved African-Americans, even though the organization running the effort and maintaining the funds was a white-run, war-relief agency based in St. Louis, called the Western Sanitary Commission, the park service said.”


  7. But sometimes the ignorant are the so-called “educated.”


    “Smithsonian Goes Full Marxist: Nuclear Family, Science, Christianity All Part of Oppressive ‘Whiteness'”

    In June, while Americans were focused on the protests and riots that engulfed U.S. cities in the wake of the horrific police killing of George Floyd, the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC) released an online “teaching tool” called “Talking About Race.” The page dedicated to “whiteness” includes an infographic attributing various aspects of American culture to “whiteness” or “white dominant culture.” Among other things, this graphic suggests that the nuclear family, science, capitalism, and the Judeo-Christian tradition are forms of oppressive “whiteness” that non-white people should reject as part of an oppressive system.

    “Whiteness and the normalization of white racial identity throughout America’s history have created a culture where nonwhite persons are seen as inferior or abnormal,” the Smithsonian “whiteness” page reads. The “teaching tool” suggests that “whiteness” needs to be overthrown in order for non-white people to become liberated from an oppressive “white culture.”

    The Smithsonian “teaching tool” takes a radical stance on “white privilege,” arguing that every white person in America has benefited from his or her skin color (“If you are white in America, you have benefited from the color of your skin.”). While it is true that white people do not have the same struggles as various racial minorities, some white people (like some Asian people) have been passed over in some cases due to affirmative action programs. White people have also been unfairly demonized as oppressors.

    “Whiteness (and its accepted normality) also exist as everyday microaggressions toward people of color,” the Smithsonian page argues. “Acts of microaggressions include verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs or insults toward nonwhites. Whether intentional or not, these attitudes communicate hostile, derogatory, or harmful messages.”

    This concept of “microaggressions” is rightly controversial. As Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff explained in their Atlantic essay that became a book — The Coddling of the American Mind — teaching people to read malice and oppression into unintentional insults involves training them to magnify unimportant episodes and label language and people dangerous. This trains them to adopt harmful psychological pathologies.

    While the Smithsonian page is right to condemn white supremacy and white nationalism, it suggests the dismantling of various positive aspects of Western culture in the name of fighting “whiteness.”

    The Smithsonian’s “whiteness” infographic
    The Smithsonian presents an infographic attributing cultural trends like the nuclear family, individualism, an emphasis on the scientific method, the Protestant work ethic, English common law, some aspects of capitalism, and Christianity to “whiteness” or “white culture.”

    “White dominant culture, or whiteness, refers to the ways white people and their traditions, attitudes and ways of life have been normalized over time and are now considered standard practices in the United States. And since white people still hold most of the institutional power in America, we have all internalized some aspects of white culture — including people of color,” the infographic warns.

    According to the infographic, “whiteness” includes cultural aspects like “Rugged Individualism” and the “Family Structure” (including the nuclear family, the husband as the breadwinner, and the wife as homemaker and subordinate to the husband).”

    Liked by 1 person

  8. How many times was Fauci wrong?

    Let us count the ways……


    “Trade adviser Peter Navarro tears into Fauci in blistering op-ed: ‘Wrong about everything’”

    “White House trade adviser Peter Navarro tore into Dr. Anthony Fauci in a stunning op-ed on Wednesday, saying the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director, who has been a leading voice on the Coronavirus Task Force, has been “wrong about everything.”

    “Dr. Anthony Fauci has a good bedside manner with the public, but he has been wrong about everything I have interacted with him on,” Navarro wrote in a blistering op-ed for USA Today.

    Navarro began by saying that Fauci “fought against” Trump’s “courageous decision” in late January to suspend flights from China as the novel coronavirus began to spread, arguing that that decision “might well have saved hundreds of thousands of American lives.”

    He continued: “When I warned in late January in a memo of a possibly deadly pandemic, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases was telling our news media not to worry.”

    Further, he wrote that in February, “Fauci was telling the public the China virus was low risk.” Navarro went on to complain Fauci was “flip-flopping on the use of masks.”

    He dinged Fauci for downplaying falling mortality rates, amid the debate over whether businesses should be allowed to reopen or stay shuttered. Navarro added: “So when you ask me whether I listen to Dr. Fauci’s advice my answer is: only with skepticism and caution.”

    Navarro’s comments come as tensions have been bubbling between the White House and Fauci. Officials have reportedly been concerned about the number of times Fauci has “been wrong on things,” according to a report last week.

    A senior administration official, though, told Fox News that Navarro’s op-ed slamming Fauci was “definitely not approved by the White House.”

    Another White House official told Fox News that Navarro is “going rogue.””


    While the WH may not like it, it needs to be said.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Here’s the op-ed.


    “In late January, when I was making the case on behalf of the president to take down the flights from China, Fauci fought against the president’s courageous decision — which might well have saved hundreds of thousands of American lives.

    When I warned in late January in a memo of a possibly deadly pandemic, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases was telling the news media not to worry.

    When I was working feverishly on behalf of the president in February to help engineer the fastest industrial mobilization of the health care sector in our history, Fauci was still telling the public the China virus was low risk.

    When we were building new mask capacity in record time, Fauci was flip-flopping on the use of masks.

    And when Fauci was telling the White House Coronavirus Task Force that there was only anecdotal evidence in support of hydroxychloroquine to fight the virus, I confronted him with scientific studies providing evidence of safety and efficacy. A recent Detroit hospital study showed a 50% reduction in the mortality rate when the medicine is used in early treatment.

    Now Fauci says a falling mortality rate doesn’t matter when it is the single most important statistic to help guide the pace of our economic reopening. The lower the mortality rate, the faster and more we can open.”

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Some good news….

    “You see the word “decrease” a lot in the report.”


    “Unemployment Claims Come in at 1.3 Million, Continuing Claims Down by 737,750”

    “Unemployment claims continue to tumble! The Labor Department’s report states that 1.3 million Americans filed unemployment claims last week, which is down by 10,000 from the previous week.

    Continuing claims fell by 737,750 to 17.338 million.

    The department revised the previous week down by 4,000 to 1.314 million Americans.

    The last four weeks saw an average of 1.375 million Americans file claims, which is “a decrease of 60,000 from the previous week’s revised average.”

    The report uses the word “decrease” a lot, which will probably disappoint those suffering from TDS:

    The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 11.9 percent for the week ending July 4, a decrease of 0.3 percentage point from the previous week’s revised rate. The previous week’s rate was revised down by 0.2 from 12.4 to 12.2 percent. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending July 4 was 17,338,000, a decrease of 422,000 from the previous week’s revised level. The previous week’s level was revised down by 302,000 from 18,062,000 to 17,760,000. The 4-week moving average was 18,272,250, a decrease of 737,750 from the previous week’s revised average. The previous week’s average was revised down by 75,500 from 19,085,500 to 19,010,000.”


    Let’s hope it continues to trend this way.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. From Michelle’s link, and the point I keep making to HRW….

    “But why should this panic us? A case (manifest illness needing or having official treatment) or an infection (just catching the bug, and no treatment needed or sought), are not as bad as a death from the bug. And there is no “spike” or “surge” in deaths.”

    Deaths, the only metric that really matters, is down and continues to decline.


  12. In Michelle’s link, the author appears to suggest that the US has returned to the expected death rate based on prior years. From February to June the US did report excess deaths — from March to May, for example, the excess death rate was calculated to be 28%. Strangely after doing some math this appears to suggest covid deaths are under-reported. Currently, the death rate is back to normal (by the end of June 27, July’s data is incomplete). So can we conclude with the author that we shouldn’t panic at the increase of new cases; not entirely. Data curves suggests a two-three week lag between increased cases and increased deaths. The author can justly make his claim if this weeks data doesn’t suggest an increase — we will need to wait about two weeks as reports are submitted and death certificates are issued to judge the accuracy of his claim. His article was written on June 30 — the increased casem rates were just being reported — I think he was rushing to judgment — and in a world where its often the first claims are deemed the most credible and facts are politically colored, I can see his motivation but he’s rushing to judgement.

    The other issue is to question if his claim, death rates are on a downward trend back to normal, is really the issue, ie are death rates the only stats we should worry about it? I’d argue, no. From a societal point of view, the infection/case rate should worry us. Harsh as it sounds, the death rate removes an infection from the pool. An current infection is a threat to others, it has a greater impact on medical resources, employment, and more. And a completely recovered case may continue to present health problems in the future — straining gov’t resources and esp in the US the family resources. Death rates are important but case rate is also important esp in terms of economics and long term effects.

    Outside of the CDC data, preliminary data collected elsewhere seems to suggest a small increase in the death rate starting around July 8. Perhaps the author is a bit quick here. However, to be fair we should wait for another week or so while official data is being collected.


  13. Navarro and Fauci have a personal feud which goes past workplace rivalries or differing ideas. There may be legitimate (or not) criticisms of Fauci, but Navarro has no credibility here. However, in defense of Fauci — he was acting as a scientist; give me data and I will create conclusions, and as more data is collected I will correct and narrow the conclusions. Much of the criticism of Fauci’s earlier claims leaves out context and also leaves out his science approach and tries to make this an ideological battle. As a political move, criticizing Fauci will not help Trump and as a public health move, it won’t help either.

    Navarro’s comment — only the mortality rate is important and the lower the mortality rate the faster we can reopen — is bizarre. Is he suggesting people return to work sick or infected? Infection rates matter and they matter in a “return to work” plan. His comment suggests a dismissive attitude to the health and safety of the ordinary worker. Its clear that Trump and his associates value economic statistics over worker’s health and they see a return to economic normalcy as key to improved electoral chances. The cynicism they employ with human lives is astounding.


  14. Academia has a WEIRD problem — much of their claims are derived from Western Educated Industrialized Rich and Democratic societies. This was first noted when psychology made claims about human nature based on their tests using undergrad students. Ironically, the “whiteness” and “white culture” poster by the Smithsonian suffers the same problem. What they claim as “whiteness or white culture” is actually WEIRD culture. And more specifically it uses the post war middle class capitalist social structure as the norm for whiteness. Pre-industrial European culture did not resemble “whiteness” as defined by the Smithsonian and even present day Mediterranean, Balkan and Slavic Europe barely resemble that description. They (the Smithsonian staff writers) are in fact probably describing their own childhoods. A good Marxists would note this and not write those claims — champagne socialists maybe but not a well educated Marxist.


  15. AJ — remember my criticism of the PPP and the use of banks? this article makes a similar claim, the US gov’t lacks the administrative ability to carry out gov’t programs. The last six months have demonstrated the failure of the US administrative state. Unfortunately, this was on full world wide display and the other powers (China, Russia, etc) will become bolder.

    Biden will impress at the debates — why? There are incredibly low expectations. As I’ve stated before, both Biden and Trump have had some cognitive decline — Biden however doesn’t suffer from narcissism and will be more willingly to have a team approach. Trump on the other likes to bluster his way through and believes he’s still on the top of his game. Trump was a poor debater against Clinton and was woefully unprepared for the first debate. If his election team keeps citing Biden’s cognitive decline, Trump will again go into a debate woefully unprepared. Declaring a victor at a debate is often a partisan claim made immediately after a debate so I imagine both will claim victory but with the incredibly low expectations, Biden will be given the benefit of the doubt. And as for its relevance in an election–Trump won the election despite debate failures. Right now, I see Biden winning even if he hid in his basement until election day. Its an anti Trump vote not a pro Biden vote. Most Biden voters trust it will be a team approach and a “big tent” decision making administration.

    The Goya “controversy” is an amusing sidebar or distraction. However, when Trump puts Goya products and promotes the purchase of his supporter’s products, he’s acting beyond decorum. Some democrats will claim it violates ethics etc (in the Trump era it matters not) but I see a late night TV pitchman — he’s degrading the presidential image and advantage the incumbent usually has.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.